Christian ‘gay cure’ therapist guilty of malpractice

Post your comment

Reader comments

This is a no-brainer. She’s a disgrace to her profession if she’s peddling these “cures”, proven not to work. Makes me wonder, are these trying to “cure” us for our benefit, or for their own selfish reasons and bigotry? She should be sent back to college.

…and not to mention that she’s doing infinitely more harm to a patient, then good – hardly merits the name “counsellor”. Religion should stick to fairy stories about talking snakes, that’s its only forte, and leave professions that involve the well-being of others to more logical and educated people.

I agree.
It’s done purely on selfish reasons and bigotry in the hope they have “saved” us, from ourselves, our minds and that we’ll conform to one of them.
Thankfully I have my own mind and will never conform to their forms of bigotry.

Excellent News!!
Her conduct was not on medical grounds but on self-interest and damaging other peoples health.
I say she should be struck off full stop without further question.
She clearly have no interest in the safety of patients so should Never be near one.
She is a disgrace to the profession.

CLC again ….they seem to have a bottomless pit of money to support these cases…I think they too should use their money in a more constructive way, like upholding true Chrisitian values ie stop the hatemongering against gays …

I’m going to get in what a debase Rich-styled comment before he does, and then we can compare what he wrote:
.Bravo brave smart woman, make degenerate ho-mo-sexuales cure better for civil and stuff and me clever idiots that ho-mo-sexuales are
.
.
.
Well, how did I do?

Oh please. she claims she’s being persecuted. Hmmm, its the pot calling the kettle black. If anything, so called “christian” nutters expect a free pass when they villify and persecute us with impunity. I hoipe she loses her licence to practice altogether. She’s a danger to society.

She may very well be a nice lady who thinks she’s doing good by saving people from what she believes is sinful. But to be a professional counsellor she has to put her personal beliefs aside and behave in a professional way.

I have to wonder why that shadowy legal centre is funding the defence; what does it have to do with religious belief whether she acted professionally or not? Or are they claiming religious belief is a defence to unprofessional conduct?

The only fair result. I’m relieved she was found guilty of malpractice because that’s what it was, in my opinion. As for her being struck off – well, in a way I’m glad she wasn’t and was given a chance to re-train because that way it’s less easy for the UNchristian Legal Centre to do their pathetic victim/martyr cr*p.
Lesley Pilkington has been treated correctly and fairly and the only sad thing is that the message still doesn’t seem to be getting through.

Yes, I must go along with Iris’s comment on this one as well. I agree, the act of subjecting this counsellor to re-training, I think certianly does immobilize the Christian legal centre from spinning the victim card into outer orbit once again.

Just to rebut the rubbish I just saw posted on the so-called Christian Legal Centre here is a statement issued on May 11th regarding Uganda and proposed forced conversion therapy under penalty of death or life imprisonment:

“Be It Resolved: That the American Psychiatric Association reaffirms its position that there is no credible scientific evidence that same sex attraction is pathological, chosen, needs “cure,” or entails threat to heterosexual families or to children;

That the American Psychiatric Association condemns societal scapegoating and stigmatization of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people anywhere in the world;

That the American Psychiatric Association condemns criminalization of homosexual behavior and calls upon the Ugandan legislature to reject the Anti-Homosexuality Bill.”

I wonder if there is a counselling / therapy service to cure homophobia…perhaps a statment from the Archbishop of Canterbury condeming the CLC legal actions against gays and telling his “christian” flock and bishops that homosexuality is not sinful etc may be the miracle cure?

Quite typical that the religious fanatics claim that it was someone else’s fault for exposing their bigotry for what it truly is, and blaming others when they get caught doing evil things in the name of their ‘religion’. Religion has been used as an excuse to murder millions upon millions of innocent people through the ages, and the Christian religion is the worst of the worst in this regard. They are evil, except for a very, very small minority of real Christians-the rest are horrid and should be treated exactly the way they treat others.

Oh get a life Johnny!
People turn to religion for many reasons, not least of which is they want some support, reason, explanation or closure. Many are simply brought up to believe in it, and never question the fact. That doesn’t make them evil, simply misguided.
‘
Jock obviously has a major bee in his bonnet over this subject as well. Sure, many people do things in the name of religion, but they also do it in the name of government, or authority, or rank. People will say and do a lot when they think that the powers that be are behind them, particularly when it happens to be an omnipotent deity.

Its not moral advantage I’m after, its restitution! Only those of us who have been abused by these people can understand the pain that’s been caused. And besides they don’t just have “misguided beliefs” they put into practice these beliefs and drive people to suicide.

While I understand your feelings in this matter I would highlight the following pearl of wisdom: You can’t solve a problem with the same thing that created it. You can’t solve hate with hate, you can’t fight fear with fear. Revenge and justice are not the same thing and should not be confused. Justice has been served fairly and democratically in this instance I think and I do not see why the inflction of pain or physical harm to bring about death is necessary. What purpose would it serve? Its not as if this woman’s opinions are carved in stone, she can change her beliefs. She is human – we all have prejudices and are capable of overcoming them.

My comment was slightly polemical but only slightly :) As one who has suffered at the hands of these people when I was a vulnerable young person I truly resent them and their methods. ‘Reparative Therapy’ is pop psychology written by someone called Elizabeth Moberly in the early 1980’s. She only had a degree in Theology and her research and methodology were condemned by experts at the time. Me and my peers were subjected to it through growing up in the evangelical church and were severely damaged emotionally and psychologically. It is inhuman that these ideas are still being promoted and is equivalent to providing razor-blades to someone who is depressed.

I understand that Jamesh.
I suffered abuse physically and mentally at the hands of both Christians in early life and Muslims in later life.
If anything I found when telling people they are genuinely appalled that religion can be so cruel.
After 4 years of abuse at the hands of Muslims 2 of my Muslim friends left the faith.
It’s not something I am proud of but it was their choice because thats how strongly they felt against their religion.
Whilst I do know not everyone in religion acts like this sadly only the bad tends to be heard.
I do find though that out of the negative of religion comes the positive of society.

I think one thing in which we can be proud is that we never become as bad as them regardless of how much they put us through.
Weither you like it or not that is now what most decent folk in the population recognise and why they support.
We start murdering them we become as bad as them.
That is one thing we’re not.
We actually can say its about who we are and love whereas they clearly cannot say that about themselves no matter how many times they say it.
It really isn’t the answer.

Yes, Pavlos, I completely agree.
There needs to be a stronger deterent against this acts so that they Know what they are doing is wrong with a prison sentence if this crime is committed.
The days of being treated like this have got to be well and truely over.

Let’s just be clear about one thing. In a free, democratic society there can be no question of making “therapy” of this kind illegal. If someone doesn’t like their sexual orienation and wants to change it, they have every right to attempt to do so, just as they have every right to call in a clairvoyant to read their tea-leaves.

Are they wasting their time and money? Yes. Should we tell them so? Yes. If they wish to ignore the warnings, they are entitled to dabble in any kind of quackery that takes their fancy – provided that they are adults. What is important is that no-one should ever be pressured into submitting to this kind of hocus-pocus, that it should not be paid for by the NHS, and that it should not take place under the auspices of any accredited health organization. It SHOULD be illegal to practise this kind of fraud on anyone under 18.

Ah but the British counselling society have a duty to say what can be classed as counselling and what does not.
Such conversion courses should not be able to advertise as counselling or effective as it is false advertising and hence illegal!

Make no mistake; I want to see an end to this fraud, but not as the result of coercion or prohibition. I want to see it wither away because everyone knows that being gay isn’t an illness or disorder that needs to be corrected; that even if you don’t like being gay you can’t change your orientation at will; and that “therapy” to help you to change is a cruel hoax. But if people are determined to be deceived, that’s their problem; we have no right to stop them. All we can do is to expose this quackery for what it is. He that hath eyes to see, let him see.

But it wasnt the law that coerced them, but the counselling council, which has to do that in order to defend conselling as a profession and as a for of medical treatment. Counsellors cant just say anything they want, they follow scientifically proven techniques.

But the fact that these therapies exist are becuase they see homsexulaity as a “sickness”. Homosexualy was previously classed as a mental sickness (I think) but not now, simply by offerring these therapies then by definition you have to tell the patient that they are menatally ill… The therapy wouldn’t be effective if you didn’t admit to that? Sounds a bit dodgy and harmful to me. I don’t know but can parents force a child into these..if so then it’s not necessarily a grown up’s decision to do it but is forced on a child and this is harmful..surely forcing a child into something like this would be illegal??? Surely you should protect the child’s wellbeing??

Actually this kind of therapy is damaging so it has to be banned.
We don’t have “therapy” because people are “Straight” so what make you think this is right?
The only reason people have a problem being Gay is because that how religion has taught society to be over the centuries.
Those having problems should indeed have “therapy” but therapy that helps them through why they feel this way.
You’ll find it is only because of society and nothing else.
So just as many old mental health treatments are deemed damaging and now illegal so this wicked practise.
If professions cannot accept that then they need to be struck off and looking for completely different jobs.

This decision is wrong. Why? Simply because so long as the person who goes along to this ‘therapy’ at their own free will then who the hell is anyone else to tell them that they’re wrong to do that? In a liberal society we should allow people to do as they wish; it cannot, MUST not, be a one way street.

Its not that peeps shouldn’t be allowed go to these people it’s the harm that the reparative therapy crowd do with their lies and unproven therapies. A lot of people end up seriously ill or commit suicide when this shyte fails (which it Always does) BTW …has anyone noticed how ugly these people always are….and really weird looking.

by forwarding people who request such therapy on to those who claim to offer it you are just reinforcing their misconception, you cannot “cure” being gay, nor is being gay a illness.
you would not prescibe unneeded antibiotics to a hypoconrdriac just because they were wrongly convinced they were unwell. medicine has to be based around treatments that work, for conditions that exist, it would be malpractice to simply base it on the beliefs of the patiant, people would get worthless or harmful treatments, the former being simply a waste, and the latter being the antithisis of the very idea of medicine “first, do no harm”.

I agree ACG. As I alluded too earlier, I hope bleaching treatment for people of colour who want to fit into a largely white society, would not be allowed. Just because someone wants it doesn’t mean it should be offered to them.

She is being punished not because she broke the law, but because she broke the rules set out for counsellors by the governing body. The governing body has to enforce it rules otherwise conselling as a profession and a medical treatment fails if it is not based on evidence.

The “treatment” should be allowed to continue – but it cannot be performed by counsellors as this is against the counsellors code. They also cannot say it works as that would be false advertising.

Adam
So where are the “therapies” for those who don’t want to be straight?
It is only because of religion and society that people feel this way.
How about giving people support rather than condemnation?
You don’t “cure” something unless you believe it is wrong.

Nonsense Adam. The woman was offering quack discredited therapy with her professional accreditation. It doesn’t work and it has harmed a great many people, many of who have even committed suicide. She should certainly be struck off for breaching the rules and using techniques that are based on gobbldegook and superstition instead of science.

And often, young people ARE coerced into this kind of therapy. A counsellor is in a position of trust with vulnerable people.

Adam wrote
” In a liberal society we should allow people to do as they wish; it cannot, MUST not, be a one way street.”
.
Adam, if a surgeon is incompetent, and has a high death rate in relation to his/her procedures, should the surgeon be allowed to continue to practice under his professional body.
.
The reason I say this is becasue the Royal College of Psychiatrists have stated that “Reparative therapies” are harmful, firstly in that they may lead to depression and anxeity, and secondly in that they may lead to suicide.
.
Adam, a person may go to a therapists to deal with the denial of their sexuality, but should they be damaged even more psychological by “Quack” professionals who want to collude with this denial

Can a parent / guardian send a child to such a therapy or is it only avaiable to adults? Parents aren’t always the best judges so it would really worry me that a child could be sent by a parent to one of these…

Do you actually have to admit to a mental illness first before you can get cured…..either the cure is harmful and should be stopped or it’s not harmful….we don’t usually allow other harmful medical treatments to take place either thru public money or otherwise , so why make an exception of this?

There has been some cases of Parents hijacking and send their children to have these ‘cures’ in the un-Great US of A!
Think there was a case not so long ago reported by PinkNews.
The guys boyfriend was publicising it because he didn’t know the whereabouts.

So if a clinician says he can cure blindness by prescribing a single pill and a diet of parsnips should we let them practice despite scientific evidence demonstrating that such a cure can not occur. If we follow your argument “in a liberal society we should allow people to do as they wish” – so we should allow this … despite the fact people would be deceived and emotionally damaged … it is the same with this discredited practice … it can not be humanely permitted

How exactly does gathering evidence and going through a legitimate formal complaints procedure amount to persecution and harrassment. I’m not really expecting an answer to that question since I suspect your just another hit and run who has no interest in discussing the complexities of this matter but like Mrs Pilkington twist things to fit your preconvieved notions or pursue your own agenda rather than objectively considering the evidence being presented by your patient.

At mention of this quack’s “retraining”, I immediately thought of “One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest”. She should have her own private Nurse Ratched administering the medically required treatments to cure her of her obvious mental illness. Come to think of it, do we know for certain that she wasn’t the one who inspired the Nurse Ratched character? (Kudos to Louise Fletcher who has made recent appearances on American network TV.)

I wonder if Lesley Pilkington and Iris Robinson are friends? Anyone on from N. Ireland? If Lesley Pilkington can be found guilty of the “gay cure” should the therapist/physiatrist of Iris Robinson’s not face the same charges?

I don’t agree that the BACP has done an adequate job in this ethical violation. She will be back counselling in a year.It reeks of the BACP trying to give the impression they have done something when in fact they have done little. Also the description of how they ran the ethical investigation givces real concern for the safety of any one who dares make a complaint. You have to wonder about the credibility and professionalism of the BACP.

Hamish, I have to agree.
.
The defensiveness of the BACP, and the difficulty that Patrick Strudwick had in bringing this case is testimony to some thing very rotten, self-serving and corupt in the counselling and psychotherapy world, where double standards and hypocrisy are rife.

There is no credibility or professionalism in the bacp or any of the charlatans brainwashed by this pseudo science . That is why 1 in 5 therapists in the london region alone, believe in hate crime against homosexuals, thinly disguised as cure techniques . Recently an atheist straight female friend of mine visited a counsellor who advised her she should attend church. This lot are not just a danger to lgbt but to others also . Just need to look at the news this week to see racism openly purported against black women in the name of psychology.

Absolutely.
Because at the end of the day she can be sent for rertraining but her opinion and reasoning will never change.
She will do this again, they will just find ways around it.
She should be just stuck off.
End of.

Clearly, anyone who would seek help from a “therapist” employed in the capacity of a quasi/pseudo science, would indeed have to be very vulnerable . However a vulnerable , gullible, persons desperation should not be molested by the charlatans employed in this ridiculous psycho babble “profession”.”therapists” like pilkington are perverse voyeurs, who just collect peoples histories, and usually regurgitate what they have been told by the service user, as a diagnosis, incompetent of making any worthy contribution to the better health of the individual. In this case , it would be particularly pernicious to any victim of bacp/christian interference.

I might be getting confused here but did the BACP condemn her for acting unprofessionally or for offering reparative therapy?. It seems to me that she was only critizied for her professionalsm and that reparative therapy is still a perfectly legitimate therapy that can be offered with the approval of the BACP and on the NHS??? If so that really stinks!

John, I don’t think reparative therapy is legitimate. The American Psychiatric Association apparently has declared it harmful and dangerous. Much of it involves praying away the gay. I see no reason why the BACP would support something so harmful.

They already *are* regulated. To be a qualified counsellor requires a lot of approvals and examinations by authorised bodies. That’s what the BACP are, and in this case she may be struck off and consequently be unable to practise.
‘
The safeguards are already there and requires no further reinforcement. I hated the last Labour government because it nannied everybody and wrapped everything in bureaucracy to a point where people couldn’t move.

Counselling and psychotherapy are not regulated by the goverment. This means that any one can set themselves up as a counsellor or psychotherapist, without any training, with out facing prosecution.
.
The goverment under Labour wanted to regulate counselling and pyschotherapy, by bringing the professions under the Health Professional Council HPC.
.
Under the conservative-libdem coallition, this has yet to come to fruition.

They are not regulated, the term therapist and psychotherapists are not protected terms.
Psychotherapy has a science behind it, it is an evidence based medical treatment. Its needs regulation in the same way dentistry and Doctors do.
So you believe regulating doctors is nannying? hmmm

CBT, Cognitive behavioural therapy is the only psychotherapy which you could say is based on scientific evidence, since it relys on the scientific method for the development of its theoretical base, and randomised control trials for the efficacy of its treatment protocols.
.
All other psychotherapies be they humanist, psychoanalytic etc, one might argue are not scientific in the traditional sense.
.
This is one reason why the NHS has been investing time and money in CBT, and not promoting other therapies.

I agree with this and I think is the most important point, I’m still not clear whether the BACP has rejected this therapy! If it causes harm then it should be barred from the UK both in public and private practices…….that’s normal isn’t, you don’t allow unsuitable medical practices to continue simply becuase there is a demand for it….

Certainly the BACP must be lobbied for that – the claims on the CLC site that the BACP has not condemned reparative therapy are highly damaging but probably (I hope!) misleading. The full judgment of the BACP has not yet been published. The other major UK accrediting body for therapists, the UKCP, issued a clear statement on the subject in Feb 2010: http://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/article1260.html. It should also be pointed out in response to those that say that this case illustrates the need for statutory regulation of therapy, that Patrick Strudwick also made a complaint against a psychiatrist along similar lines to the Royal College of Psychiatrists but they rejected it. The RCP is regulated by the General Medical Council – a statutory body. So arguably the self-regulated BACP has behaved far more appropriately in this case than the state-regulated RCP.

As a recently retired counsellor I agree that the BACP delivered the correct judgement. As a Christian, I would say that Mrs Pilkington was guilty of the sin of pride. God loves all of his creation. It was the early interpreters of the Bible who said that homosexuality was against the will of God and this has been rebutted time and time again by modern interpretations.

What all counsellors should be taught is that a) homosexuality is NOT a lifestyle choice and b) whether a gay relationship is good or bad lies in the quality of the relationship, not its sexuality.

its called “motivation reasoning” when there is evidence against what you believe, therefore in this case there are many studies out there that show evidence that conversion/reparative therapy doesn’t work and is harmful….these people go into motivational reasoning. The idoit effect is another thing that plays in this kind of thinking. We all do this but conservatives do it to a higher degree. Read the book “The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science and Reality”

PinkNews covers religion, politics, entertainment, finance, and community news for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community in the UK and worldwide. Founded to produce broadsheet quality journalism for the LGBT community, we cover politics to theology in an intelligent manner.